joekraft wrote:
I don't mean to ask you to prove a negative, but... I see a lot of head/head and shoulders portraits on flickr that look like they are in the same league as an 85 1.2. It looks to be exactly what I would want. Do you have any at close range that show how poorly the 85 performs in that context, such that you don't even use it? I think it would be very informative to a lot of folks watching this thread. Or in other words - if this is as bad as it sounds for what I want it for, help save me some money ...Show more →
All this is pretty well documented on Lloyd ZF-lenses paid articles, so it feels really stupid to see all the effort to do the same/similar tests by myself when I see in field same happening. I'm printing next time at Wednesday (I'll try to not print every day since turning printer on consumes ink) and I'll print some test chart, if I have time to prepare that, then later this week I could take some shots to clarify what this focus shift means in practice since this seems to be so big mystery even all fast lenses suffer a little from it.
85ZE does perform pretty well in close range when closed down to f/2-2.8 but personally I cannot tolerate any focus errors. In order to focus portrait to surface of eye (not tip eyelashes, nose or some other place but to the eye itself) I would need to focus with DOF button pressed and for that I run out of hands.
BTW. If you evaluate flickr small resolution pictures then it does not matter that much where you focus or is there focus shift. For websize may rules won't apply, you can sharpen almost any blurry picture to usable if you present it in some 500 pixel size. The pictures which are about 1000px on longer dimension start a little show what lens is able to do but still leaves a lot of room for manipulation. I will evaluate my photos either on 2560x1600 screen at fullsize or A3 print, neither will leave no room for any focus errors.
Samuli Vahonen wrote
"if you shoot f/1.4-2.7999999 focus at aperture you are going to use (notice that in bright conditions live view may close the lens since the view is too bright - one bad thing about having electronic aperture)"
Samuli, I think you may have your liveview settings wrong. It may help you to read over your manual to figure this out, but I've been hearing you talk about your liveview, and it's acting like my 1Ds3's liveview. You can set the 5DIIs liveview to work like it's making movies, by setting it so the movie function turns on when you press liveview and then to record you press the set button, but rather then pressing the set button you press the shutter and it takes a photo. If you do it this way, liveview won't act erratically lighting the scene when it's to dark and going to bright on you, or closing up the aperture. It'll do a WYSIWYG thing, to show you how a movie would look. The 5DII can do both types of liveview, the 1Ds3 can only do the one type of liveview. Just a thought, as it may help.
Best,
Adam
P.S. I never thought to turn down my monitor brightness.
The overhead shot of the woman in the pink sari set against the brown stones is superb. I cannot think why you have waited this long to present it to us.
That is why I said it is akin to proving a negative. If a close in portrait comes out blurry, is it because of focus shift, because the lens is soft, or because of user error? Could be any/all. I just thought you might have an example that showed even when all conditions are set to get an optimum image, it still comes out bad, or rather, that illustrates what all the fuss is about at close range. Especially because as you said, it is hard to get a sense from just web images, and I don't think I can rent one, but I'll have to check. Just to be clear, I'm not challenging any assertion of its quality, pro or con. I'm just finding it hard to guage what the assertions mean in the real world.
Samuli Vahonen wrote:
All this is pretty well documented on Lloyd ZF-lenses paid articles, so it feels really stupid to see all the effort to do the same/similar tests by myself when I see in field same happening. I'm printing next time at Wednesday (I'll try to not print every day since turning printer on consumes ink) and I'll print some test chart, if I have time to prepare that, then later this week I could take some shots to clarify what this focus shift means in practice since this seems to be so big mystery even all fast lenses suffer a little from it.
85ZE does perform pretty well in close range when closed down to f/2-2.8 but personally I cannot tolerate any focus errors. In order to focus portrait to surface of eye (not tip eyelashes, nose or some other place but to the eye itself) I would need to focus with DOF button pressed and for that I run out of hands.
BTW. If you evaluate flickr small resolution pictures then it does not matter that much where you focus or is there focus shift. For websize may rules won't apply, you can sharpen almost any blurry picture to usable if you present it in some 500 pixel size. The pictures which are about 1000px on longer dimension start a little show what lens is able to do but still leaves a lot of room for manipulation. I will evaluate my photos either on 2560x1600 screen at fullsize or A3 print, neither will leave no room for any focus errors.
it was wonderful today after last night's storm, so we decided to go for
a little spring "zeiss" road trip
100MP ZE and 35ZE, easy to tell which shots come from which lens.
adamdewilde wrote:
Samuli, I think you may have your liveview settings wrong. It may help you to read over your manual to figure this out, but I've been hearing you talk about your liveview, and it's acting like my 1Ds3's liveview. You can set the 5DIIs liveview to work like it's making movies, by setting it so the movie function turns on when you press liveview and then to record you press the set button, but rather then pressing the set button you press the shutter and it takes a photo. If you do it this way, liveview won't act erratically lighting the scene when it's to dark and going to bright on you, or closing up the aperture. It'll do a WYSIWYG thing, to show you how a movie would look. The 5DII can do both types of liveview, the 1Ds3 can only do the one type of liveview. Just a thought, as it may help....Show more →
I use all modes of live view and constantly change them since I try to learn taking videos as well and I'll record some videos from locations as well. For some lenses I use exposure simulation (ZE lenses) and for some I use the still mode without exposure simulation (the ones adapted with EMF programmable ships) or when I change lenses in fast phase I have ended up shooting ZE also without exposure simulation. If in situation in which camera automatically uses smaller aperture to show live view picture but I would use alternative lens with manual aperture the live view picture would "clip" the highlights, the sensor cannot handle too much light and still show good picture, at some point pixels get overstatured when too many photons hit them.
I checked manual (naturally I have read it before but since you said it's explained there I was thinking I did miss something) and it doesn't even mention that in bright light aperture is closed down to be able to show live view picture properly. So could you please clarify which page/chapter of manual you are referring to? I did re-read 107-126 (whole live view chapter), specially paying attention to 109 (modes), 125-126 (the gray warning/notes boxes).
There are following menu options affecting how live view is shown. I'm not sure what you refer by having mode in which lens aperture is not adjusted to protect sensor from too much light, please advice what menu combination to use:
"LV func. setting":
- Disable
- Stills only
- Stills+movie
Then next menu is called "Screen settings":
- Stills display
- Exposure simulation
- Movie display
I don't typically watch to the lens when I'm shooting since I'm on other side of the camera, but I find this happening when I'm in 10x and press DOF button to mitigate focus shift when focusing and then I see that nothing happens when I press DOF button. First I did think the DOF button doesn't work but then I once checked and aperture was closed to f/2.8-4 (hard to evaluate by watching the lens from front) even I had f/2 selected from camera. This only happens in bright light so in Finland it's problem only in few days a year
Instead of live view settings it seems that using M and Av (I did not try other modes since I never use them) seem to have difference in way how aperture behaves, again no word on manual about this either. I'll need to study this more to figure out is there even possibility to automatically use the shooting aperture for live view focusing as well, which would mitigate whole focus shift for live view users automatically.
snowboarder wrote:
it was wonderful today after last night's storm, so we decided to go for
a little spring "zeiss" road trip
100MP ZE and 35ZE, easy to tell which shots come from which lens.
Andrew
Help! I have been snowboarded! Again! Great pictures, Andrew, plain wonderful!
joekraft wrote:
philber that overhead street scene is wonderful. Thanks for posting these. Your portrait of the lady shot at 3.2 looks very sharp. It certainly makes these concerns posted in the reviews seem overstated. Did you ever shoot anything similar wide open?
Thanks for the kind words, Joe, and to you too, Calvin.
Joe, I do not have such shots wide open. First, because shooting wide open is not my cup of tea. I am not into the minimal-DOF-maximum-background-blur type of look. Second, because, if I were, the Zeiss 85 would not be my lens of choise, as it is not very good for this, certainly not as good as, say, the 85L. Third, because executing pictures like this handheld, wide open, close up would give me a keeper rate much too low for my liking, in view of the excruciatingly thin DOF combined with focus shift and hand movement.
joekraft wrote:
philber that overhead street scene is wonderful. Thanks for posting these. Your portrait of the lady shot at 3.2 looks very sharp. It certainly makes these concerns posted in the reviews seem overstated. Did you ever shoot anything similar wide open?
Thanks for the kind words, Joe, and to you too, Calvin.
Joe, I do not have such shots wide open. First, because shooting wide open is not my cup of tea. I am not into the minimal-DOF-maximum-background-blur type of look. Second, because, if I were, the Zeiss 85 would not be my lens of choise, as it is not very good for this, certainly not as good as, say, the 85L. Third, because executing pictures like this handheld, wide open, close up would give me a keeper rate much too low for my liking, in view of the excruciatingly thin DOF combined with focus shift and hand movement.
Sorry if that does not help...
adamdewilde wrote:
joekraft - I went and tested the 85, I suggest you do the same if you can. Here is what happened to me, now this could be user error. Maybe someone can chime in.
Adam, what you experienced is not focus shift IMHO. Here is David Lloyd's brief introduction to focus shift. It states clearly that focus shifts when the lens is focused at f:1.2 and then stopped down to f:2.8. Focus shift explained by David Lloyd
Alright I have a quick question about this shot I took with the ZE while waiting for my number to be called at the gov office. It was raining, as you'll see.. One of the shots is a 100% crop the other is just a crop of how I wanted the image to look. You'll notice purple fringing, is this normal, what would cause it? Also I've noticed on a few shots I took of a family friend's baby that there was cyan/green fringing around his cheek while he was backlit. I also noticed magenta fringing while shooting a wooden chair that was somewhat backlit.
Loving the lens, but curious about the slightly weird color anomalies. Although they can be fixed in photoshop I just want to know if these things are expected or not.
Hi for all. Long time I am seeing your photos here an I want to buy a Zeiss 35f2 for my 5DII. I like yours landscapes very much. I would like to examine a RAW file on my computer. Anybody can send me one? Sorry for my english and thanks...
Juan Amores
I am going to bet the water acted like a prism - breaking down the light into a rainbow effect - in this picture anyways.
What are you wagering on said bet? I'm willing to place $100 on it being longitudinal chromatic aberration, as I see in every image where a bright/blown highlight is just outside th plane of focus with this lens.
